Pictures released Friday, February 15 by the Venezuelan Ministry of Communications and Information--and reportedly taken the day before--show Chavez in his hospital bed with daughters Maria Gabriela (L) and Rosa Virginia (R).

Views » February 17, 2013

How Long Can Hugo Chavez Call In Sick?

Venezuela’s ailing president has kept the wolves at bay for 69 days, but restlessness is brewing.

Email this article to a friend

your email

your name

recipient(s) email (comma separated)

message

captcha

The decision to disconnect Chávez from his assisted breathing machine—if he is in fact connected to one, as is widely assumed, even in Venezuela—is not one that can be taken lightly by his family and political successors.

Until the Venezuelan government released photos on Friday of Hugo Chávez reading a newspaper in a hospital bed, the president of Venezuela had not been publicly seen since Dec. 10, 2012, when he left for Cuba to undergo a fourth operation related to complications from cancer.

What exactly is happening with Chávez is a mystery because the Venezuelan government has treated his health as a state secret, and the Cuban regime, which never publicly discusses any government official’s health, has had no trouble following suit. More than 30 vague official government communiqués have been issued—mainly by Venezuelan Vice President Nicolás Maduro, Chávez’s designated successor, and Minister Jorge Arreaza, Chávez’s son-in-law—but almost all have limited themselves to descriptors such as “stable,” “delicate,” “complex” and “difficult.”

Unlike Chávez’s other trips to Cuba for medical treatment—when he maintained a presence on Twitter and appeared on TV —this time Chávez communicates through typed letters and stories from his cabinet members. “Why is a person who can sign letters, a person who can make jokes, not able to speak to the country?” demanded Henrique Capriles Radonski, the opposition’s losing presidential candidate.

Meanwhile, Venezuelans of all stripes are asking for proof of life. Chávez skipped his inauguration in January, but according to the country’s Constitution (practically dictated by Chávez), only the president can declare himself incapable of performing his duties. And if the president is, in fact, incapable of making such a declaration, well … what then?

Is there a precedent for this? Has a dying/convalescing president ever handed his fate over to the leaders of another country in quite this way? Has it ever happened before that a nation’s cabinet must meet in another country in order to run its business? Has a small, poor country like Cuba ever held so much influence over its patron?

To be clear, when the Chávez-controlled Venezuelan Supreme Court cleared the way for the president to move to Cuba indefinitely and even to skip his own inauguration, the opposition called the decision a “grave alteration of the constitutional order.” Opposition leader Maria Corina Machado spoke of “usurpation” of the legal process. The mayor of Caracas, Antonio Ledezma, said that Maduro had basically carried out a coup, not against Chávez but against the way things are supposed to work constitutionally. But Organization of American States Secretary-General José Miguel Insulza said that Venezuela’s constitutional crisis had “already been resolved by the three state branches of Venezuela, as the executive articulated the problem, the legislative considered it, and the judicial branch solved it.” Never mind that all three state branches are firmly under the control of Chávez forces.

There are, of course, all sorts of reasons to try to maintain some sort of administrative continuity, no matter what’s going on. And the decision to disconnect Chávez from his assisted breathing machine—if he is in fact connected to one, as is widely assumed, even in Venezuela—is not one that can be taken lightly by his family and political successors.

It’s also clear that Maduro and his Cuban advisors have concluded that time is needed to allow Maduro to consolidate power and improve his poll numbers before the unavoidable next presidential election. Then again, they don’t want to wait too long: Maduro could probably win an election if it were to be held soon, what with recent Chávez victories in October and again in December (by which point Chávez was already bedridden in Cuba), but the odds could turn if the election is held much later and the economic crisis brewing in Venezuela develops its own momentum.

Eight million Venezuelans confirmed Chávez’s 14 years in power in the last election, but 6.5 million—the most ever—voted against him. And no one in Venezuela—not Maduro or any of Chávez’s other political and familial heirs—enjoys, or is likely to enjoy, the near-religious ardor that Chávez has. What this means is that until Chávez reappears or is declared dead, and even beyond that, Venezuela—and Cuba if the opposition wins the post-Chávez elections and cuts ties—is in for a long period of instability.

Help In These Times Continue Publishing

Progressive journalism is needed now more than ever, and In These Times needs you.

Achy Obejas, a Havana-born member of the In These Times Board of Editors, is the author of Ruins (Akashic 2009, akashicbooks.com) and Aguas & Otros Cuentos (Editorial Letras Cubanas, 2009). A former staff writer for the Chicago Tribune, she is also the translator, into Spanish, of Junot Diaz's Pulitzer Prize-winning The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao (Riverhead 2008). She is currently the Distinguished Visiting Writer at Mills College, Oakland, Calif.

A right-wing diatribe like this has no place in a progressive publication. It angers me to see this right wing attack on one of the most progressive governments in the world in this publication that I have been supporting with an intention to support progressive journalism. Why is the opposition repeatedly quoted and never is there a quote from a member of the vast majority who support Chavez? Why is the article primarily a discussion of these right wing talking points? Why is seeking medical care in another country referred to as "handing his fate to the leaders of another country"? Why is the OAS Secretary-General's judgement so casually dismissed? To say "It's also clear that Maduro and his Cuban advisors..." is right wing propaganda. Surely he has Venezuelan advisors. Thank god Venezuela doesn't suffer from a right wing republican controlled supreme court like we do. Please fire the author of this article. There's more than enough of this kind of right wing propaganda in the corporate media.

Posted by Chris Brentlinger on 2013-02-19 17:57:48

The arch-liberal In These Times simply could not wait to have a member of its board write the following words with which this article ends:

(quote) What this means is that until Chávez reappears or is declared dead, and even beyond that, Venezuela—and Cuba if the opposition wins the post-Chávez elections and cuts ties—is in for a long period of instability. (end quote)

Achy Obejas clearly has been drinking too much Miami water. Had she been able to contain her bladder on more day, she would have had Chavez back in Caracas and been able to comment on the massive outpouring of those in Venezuela and those of us around the world that stand behind the Bolivarian Revolution of the Venezuelan people. And if I may just say it for one in my life to someone, "Get a real job, Achy".

Posted by David Brookbank on 2013-02-18 16:58:25

Awsome! let suscribe a constitution and make the people believe that it is the voice of the volk and its is God´s voice! . Of course he has been making a constitution at his pleasure, no doubt! You all bandits!

Posted by qwax on 2013-02-18 02:23:49

Awesome. So this record must be full of comments about Articles 230-236, and surely the Venezuelan Supreme Court cited to those comments extensively when it decided last month.

Ms. Yriat, do you really expect us to focus on one tree and ignore the forrest? News flash: la selva arde. Oh wait, you already know but just refuse to accept it.

Posted by Maduro pierde por bastante on 2013-02-17 21:20:00

Ms. Obejas, a "Chavez controlled Supreme Court" is a very weighty topic indeed for you to be dropping lightly in a sentence, unexplained. If you know as much about the relationship between the Venezuelan presidency and court as you do about the drafting of the constitution (see comment below), I would suggest you offer a factual foundation in support of this far reaching, pejorative, and very technical --I might ad-- assertion. What qualifies you to make that characterization? An incident, and allegiance? Chavez's power stems from a political mandate, not terror or violence. After the 2002 coup, in which Chavez was kidnapped, certain members of the court refused to acknowledge that there had been a coup or that Chavez's incumbency was valid. What did Chavez do? He, perfectly legally, added members to the court. He threw no one in jail. He eschewed all violence. Now, you come along and imply dictatorial, authoritarian, autocratic baloney, Ms, Obejas, with that fun-to- say "Chavez controlled Supreme Court" ! !Could you give us a record of decisions of the court that ran contrary to the preferences of the president? I would not think so, since your knowledge at least appears to be as superficial as it is pejorative and misleading. It is a diservice to Americans and Venezuelans. If you had more to support your derisions they would be less irresponsible. You probably see them as fashionable.

Posted by Monica Yriart on 2013-02-17 20:57:31

The author of the above article states that Venzuela's constitution was "practically dictated by" Chávez. Perhaps Mr. Achy Obejas is unaware that following 2 National Referenda and an authorizing Supreme Court decision, in August 1999 a National Constituent Assembly was convened in Venezuela to draft a new constitution. The National Constituent Assembly's 131 representaives were elected from districts throughout Venezuela in internationally monitored elections. They were charged with drafting the new constitution. Chavez did present a model. The records of the debates document deliberations in committees and on the floor, illustrating the crafting, discussion and reasoning involved in the drafting of the sections and clauses of the document. These are public record, Mr. Obejas. The Constitution was released in December and subsequently ratified in a third National Referendum by the Venezuelan people. So, no, Mr. Obejas, the constitution was not "practically dictated" by President Chávez. Your biased and sloppy suggestion that is was is typical of the misinforming journalism on Venezuela that has deprived the US public of a straight story, and Venezuelans of straight reporters. It is unfortunate. The assertion resides in that heavily biased netherland between ignorance and misrepresentation.